7 ms·
Yes, they could. But... rising hired humans in company isn't good sign for investors. But when they're hired using subcontractor company it's OK.
by mobilio 8y ago
Yes, they could. But... rising hired humans in company isn't good sign for investors.
But when they're hired using subcontractor company it's OK.
- techntoke 8y agoWhy do they need investors?
- imgabe 8y agoThey're a publicly traded company.
- toomuchtodo 8y agoCould they not go private? Their capital intensive days are behind them, and they have the resources to do so.
- imgabe 8y agoGoogle? I'm sure there's some way they could, but I don't think it would be easy. A large part of their employees' compensation is stock, which if they can't sell it on the public market is not very useful.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- p1necone 8y agoWhy is it okay when they're hired using a subcontractor company? Is it investors being stupid (unlikely?) Is subcontractor headcount/cost not public information? Are contractors actually good? Are contractors instead of employees good for google, but detrimental to society as whole? (something investors aren't known to care about, so it makes sense). Some other possibility I haven't considered?
- im3w1l 8y agoAt a guess: If the economy goes down the drain and Google needs to cut costs asap, they could kick out the contractors with a moments notice and tell the software people "no more perks for you". And the SWE's couldn't easily leave over the lost perks if all other places were struggling at the same time. So in that sense it's less risky.